Do Flaming and Flaming Burst stack?

[Iku Rex]

Except that the Burst quality also includes the +1 appropriate energy enhancement.

I know that. It's also a +2 weapon ability. Half of that is the +1d6 energy damage. The remainder should then be equal to a +1 weapon ability. It isn't.

 

[Spatzimaus]

I know that. It's also a +2 weapon ability. Half of that is the +1d6 energy damage. The remainder should then be equal to a +1 weapon ability. It isn't.

Yep. A longsword (19-20/x2) would only add the 1d10 10% of the time; if you needed an 11 to hit, it'd threaten 20% of the time and confirm 50% of those threats, and this ratio stays constant unless you needed a 20 to hit.

Even a Keen Scimitar with Improved Critical would only add the extra dice 45% of the time, and 45% of 1d10 is 2.475 damage, still somewhat below the 3.5 damage another +1 bonus would give. To make things worse, if the attack roll needs a high number to hit (13+), you start losing some of that large threat range (you can't threaten if you don't hit).

On the other hand, there's one big difference between a +1 Shocking Flaming sword and a +1 Flaming Burst sword that someone pointed out, even if you have no problem with stacking elements: command words. It'd take two separate actions to turn on the elemental effects on the first sword, while it only takes one for the second sword. And, you could also interpret the burst effect to work independent of the command-word for the Flaming effect.

 

[Kershek]

How much would you charge someone to put flaming on their sword and then put flaming burst on it later? Would it be:

(8,315 gold for a +1 flaming longsword)

1) 8,315 + 10,000 (market+3 - market+2)

or

2) 8,315 + 24,000 (market+4 - market+2)

It seems that #2 is correct, but if you go that way, you're wasting a +1 market bonus for nothing, since flaming and flaming burst doesn't stack. Flaming burst says it functions as a flaming weapon that also bursts, so wouldn't you just pay +1 market more when adding burst to your weapon?

Who does it with method #1 and who does it with method #2?

Edit: Changed price of longsword from 10,315 to 8,315. Thanks, Spatz!

 

[Spatzimaus]

How much would you charge someone to put flaming on their sword and then put flaming burst on it later?

By the books, you can't, AFAIK. There's no rule for "upgrading" anything other than Enhancement bonuses; you can add new abilities, of course, but you can't modify old ones like that. I think you'd have to somehow remove the Flaming ability (dropping you back to a simple +1 bonus) before putting on the new Flaming Burst ability, paying the difference between a +3 and a +1 (16k).

Math notes a +1 Flaming longsword only costs 8,315, not 10,315.

Now, that having been said, I've always treated Flaming Burst as the obvious upgrade of Flaming, and allowed them to pay for the difference (your option 1). IMC there are also a series of abilities like Greater Flaming, which is a +4-cost ability that is an upgrade of Flaming Burst, and it makes sense that people should be able to add those secondary elemental abilities on as you progress.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Spatzimaus,

You raise some good points. A few things I would like to add.

(1) I consider flaming burst a direct upgrade of flame. No, you can't have flaming + flaming burst. A crit w/longsword does d6+d10 flame. All of the above are not obvious from the letter of the rules, but balancewise they are the best way to play it.

(2) Multiple d6 energies are worthless against intelligent enemies that choose to ward with multiple Endure Elements -- a very accessible spell even for nonspellcasters once you hit ~10th level. A bursting weapon will cut through Endure Elements.

(3) Fancy weapons are not cost effective unless you are playing energy + energy + GMW. Therefore, the fancy weapon are really for the DM to play with -- the nominal cost is not an object to the DM like it would be a PC.

 

[Hypersmurf]

... unless you are playing energy + energy + GMW.

... doesn't everybody?

-Hyp.

 

[Spatzimaus]

(3) Fancy weapons are not cost effective unless you are playing energy + energy + GMW.

I wouldn't say that. Some day I'll introduce you to one of my characters who uses a +1 Sure Striking Keen Body Feeder Icy Burst Scimitar (+7 cost). Even without GMW he's frightening.

 

[Kalshane]

... doesn't everybody?

-Hyp.

I don't. I actually house-ruled that GMW over-rides any magical properties already on the weapon, much like Holy Sword does, to prevent the "+1 weapon with 10 pluses worth of nifties" issue. Though I suppose with the new DR rules in 3.5 it won't really make as much of a difference.

 

[kreynolds]

(2) Multiple d6 energies are worthless against intelligent enemies that choose to ward with multiple Endure Elements ...

I'm not so sure about this. Endure Elements doesn't stack, and you have to choose the energy type at the time of casting. So, AFAIK, while you may have Endure Elements (cold) and Endure Elements (fire) going, only one of them will actually work at a time. Am I incorrect on this? I ask because I'm not 100% sure.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'm not so sure about this. Endure Elements doesn't stack, and you have to choose the energy type at the time of casting. So, AFAIK, while you may have Endure Elements (cold) and Endure Elements (fire) going, only one of them will actually work at a time. Am I incorrect on this? I ask because I'm not 100% sure.

I'm pretty sure that Endure Elements [Fire] doesn't stack with Resist Elements [Fire] or Protection From Elements [Fire], because all three act on exactly the same points of damage.

If I deal you 20 points of fire damage, and you have EE[f] and RE[f] running, then EE negates 5 points, and RE negates 12 points... but the 5 the EE negates are the same as 5 of the 12 RE negates, so 8 points get through.

If you have EE[f] and EE[c] running, and I deal 6 points of fire damage and 6 points of cold damage, then each spell intercepts 5 points. The two damage types don't overlap, so you take 1 point of fire damage and 1 point of cold damage.

-Hyp.